Saturday, October 21, 2006

They're Not Coming Not To Take You Away

When will the jackbooted thugs stop not sweeping down in their unmarked vans and silent, radar-proof black helicopters not to take us all away? When will we be left alone for opening our mouths in opposition to their wicked scheme of defending our freedom to speak? How long can they tolerate our bravery? Well, I will not stop speaking out against the dangers of passing laws against detaining citizens! Laws forbidding the government from detaining citizens are clearly constitutional, and must therefore be protested as dangerous to the freedom of everyone the world over to use and threaten violence against civilian targets for political gain.

After all, just because the Constitution doesn't list a right of foreigners to commit terrorism, that doesn't mean they shouldn't have it. Why, we might want to commit terrorism ourselves one day, and having denied that right to our enemies, it would be hard to justify taking it up for ourselves.

So let us charge directly from "alien nonaligned combatants" to "random US citizen", with a leap of faith directly over ("but it might happen"). We need not use Occam's Razor here, because likelihood is not important. Only a possibility, based on partisan superstition, is necessary to assert proof.

What we must do, if the freedom to terrorize is to be preserved for posterity, is disregard both outdated logic and the reality we see around us, but know not to be truly real. To wit: we know that the government wants to imprison some set of citizens as terrorists, and have it be legal. Therefore, dispensing with outdated logic, we know that it would need to pass a law that doesn't make gitmoing citizens legal. Since this law would not make it legal for them to do so., they would have to break the law to do it. Since we know they are willing to break the law, that is why they needed to pass another one. The reason most people can't understand that is that they insist on using the outdated form of logic, rather than the latest trend.

Others fail to understand that the government desperately wants to send citizens to jail, without possibility of habeas corpus. That is why they in governement uniformly repeatedly say they don't want to detain citizens. They keep running for reelection, somehow hiding their true purpose, which is to build enough jails to hold us all.

One wonders how it escapes the average person's attention. After all, we've been sent to public schools, and have sat through hour upon hour of sensitivity training. If only we had been exposed to the new form of logic earlier, perhaps prenatally, we would finally understand what isn't happening.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, October 15, 2006

The Right Way to Protect Schools

The last few years have seen several incidents in which one or two men have undertaken violence at schools. They typically put on paramilitary garb and bring enough weaponry to terrorize the entire school. Many large school districts have metal detectors in high schools, but a metal detector is useless against someone who comes in with no intention of surrendering his weapon. Aside from militarizing the schools, protecting schoolchildren while they learn seems to be a difficult task. Doing so while maintaining a positive learning atmosphere seems especially daunting.

Well, a new method to combat the violence comes from the Burleson, Texas school district.

BURLESON — Hoping to stiffen its defense against intruders, the Burleson school district is training students and teachers to fight back with everything from books to scissors.

The "critical incident response" training for teachers and students instructs them to disrupt attackers by barraging them with classroom supplies, officials said.

"Crawling under a table and hoping and waiting for rescue is not a recipe for survival," Greg Crane, an incident response trainer, said in a report by Dallas-Fort Worth television station KTVT.

Crane's wife, school principal Lisa Crane, adds, "Do we need to put armies in schools? I have a small army here." 600 teachers have received training in how to fight back, including using any means possilble to distract and harass the attacker.

Hopefully one of the components of such training would be to tell students that in an emergency situation, as in every situation, they have the choice to act or not to act. If they choose not to act, they are putting their fate in the hands of someone with proven disregard for their safety. If they choose to act, the power is theirs. As Blonde Sagacity put it, "I think it's incredibly empowering for the children - especially in light of the stress that current events have placed on them.".

There may be some parents who fear training kids to fight back will increase their child's likelihood of being harmed in a school attack. I think recent history has shown us that killers love attacking schools precisely because they expect little resistance.

When that bad man attacked the Amish school, I thought, "What if that teacher had a gun? Would those kids be alive today?" But I think the real question is, "What if those kids had all rushed and attacked the attacker?" If he had known they would do that, would he have attacked them?

It is perhaps the most firmly entrenched right, the right of self-defense. It's about time we taught our kids the proper way to exercise that right.

Next time there is a school shooting, just remember that the attacker was expecting an easy victim. You can bet he won't find one in Burleson, Texas.

(original story and another link)

Sphere: Related Content

Blog stats

Add to Technorati Favorites